ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Pixtral Large (25.02)

Pixtral Large (25.02) comes out ahead, 33 to 27 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 4.1

    Released Aug 5, 2025

    27/100
    • ECI144.1
    • Price$15.00 / $75.00
    • Context200K
    Full specs Remove Claude Opus 4.1
  2. Our pick

    Mistral AI

    Pixtral Large (25.02)

    Released Apr 8, 2025

    33/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Pixtral Large (25.02)

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Pixtral Large (25.02) is our pick

Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (27). It leads on price. Claude Opus 4.1 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest pricePixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02) $3.00 · Claude Opus 4.1 $30.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1 200,000 · Pixtral Large (25.02) 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsClaude Opus 4.1Claude Opus 4.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Pixtral Large (25.02): Text, Images
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Opus 4.1Pixtral Large (25.02)
Price50%027
Inputs & features30%7050
Context window20%3224
Overall100%27/10033/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Pixtral Large (25.02) specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Opus 4.1AnthropicPixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)144.1—
ECI rank#81 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions77.3%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics12.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics68.9%—
SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues73.4%—
Price per million tokens
Input$15.00$2.00 (best)
Output$75.00$6.00 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$30.00$3.00 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window200,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output32,000 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model ID——
API providers14 (best)3
ReleasedAug 5, 2025Apr 8, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 31, 2025—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Claude Opus 4.1$300.00
  • Pixtral Large (25.02)$32.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1 or Pixtral Large (25.02)?

Pixtral Large (25.02) is the better all-round choice, scoring 33/100 against Claude Opus 4.1 (27). It leads on price. Claude Opus 4.1 wins on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Pixtral Large (25.02)?

Pixtral Large (25.02) is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Claude Opus 4.1 costs $15.00 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Pixtral Large (25.02) versus $30.00 for Claude Opus 4.1 (10× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Claude Opus 4.1 has an ECI of 144.1 and Pixtral Large (25.02) has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Pixtral Large (25.02) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.1 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Pixtral Large (25.02). Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 4.1 up to 32,000, Pixtral Large (25.02) up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Opus 4.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Pixtral Large (25.02) accepts text and images. Claude Opus 4.1 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Claude Opus 4.1 and Pixtral Large (25.02) are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the newest, released Aug 5, 2025. Pixtral Large (25.02) came out Apr 8, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 4.1 Mar 31, 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons